One in Four Americans Need Permission to Work

Once a year, a bureaucrat from the Department of Bedding and Upholstery stops in to see us at my work in a fabric showroom here in Columbus Ohio.   They want to make sure we have a tag that we are required to put on the bottom of our upholstered items.   Why do we have to put a tag on the bottom?  I don't know.  I suppose, so that the consumer can check to see who upholstered it if they ever forget.   I guess I can hang with that, even though it seems a bit silly. I have a bunch of the tags in the back room.

 

  But then the weird thing is they also make you give them, once a year a piece of each of the materials you use in upholstering--- some foam, some polyester batting, some burlap, some deck pad, some decking fabric.   They charge you a fee--- I think it was $65 last year to test the foam, batting, burlap, deck pad, and decking certify that it is really foam, batting, burlap, deck pad and decking.    You then get a certificate that you can show to customers--- as if anyone was interested.   My question is why we have to do that?   If they are worried that the foam we use is not really foam, shouldn't they be asking for a sample from the supplier that we get the foam from?   And what if we decide to switch suppliers because another one has a better price--- would we have to get it re-certified?  I suppose so.  

 

So why do they REALLY want you to put tags on your furniture and get your foam certified?   Because, in the old days, if you were an upholsterer, you might want to limit competition.   If you could show that the guy/gal working down the street, or out of his house was not certified, I suppose you could keep him from competing with you.    I suppose, I should even be in favor of the annual hassle from the Ohio Bedding and Upholstery Dept.    After all, we do enough upholstery that we can afford the tags and the fees.   Then when Jane, who does a little upholstery out of her home because her husband recently lost his job due to additional government regulation tries to upholster her neighbor's wing chair, I could report her and drive her out of business and into the welfare rolls.  But hey, more business for me.

 

But will this help the consumer?  Will this help potential business-people who want to help themselves?  Of course not. 

 

How about we compete in a free market, appealing to what the CONSUMER wants, or doesn't want?  Wouldn't we all be better off for that?  And wouldn't Ohioans be better off if they didn't have to pay taxes for the government to engage in such useless regulation?  Couldn't Ohio very easily eliminate this yearly hassle and save its taxpayers thousands?  

 

Of course, but that's not what is happening, according to the article below, quoting the Wall Street Journal, one in four Americans need government permission--- that is, a state license--- in order to work.

 

What are your thoughts?  Do you see this, as I do, as a negative trend?

 

Best Wishes,

 

Bernie Iven

http://blog.aynrandcenter.org/one-in-four-americans-needs-permission-to-work/

Why the Obama Stimulus Didn't Stimulate

Stimulus packages are essentially Keynesian programs that governments like-- because it increases their power--- but which never work.  In other words, they stimulate government, but rarely the economy. 

 

A new report from Stanford University economists John Cogan and John Taylor says, "There was little if any net stimulus," resulting from President Obama's $862 billion package.

Worse, say the authors, the White House should have known it would not work.  "The irony," they write, "is that basic economic theory and practical experience predicted this would happen."

But why the stimulus didn't work is a little more complex.  The authors break down the three kinds of Keynesian stimulus packages.

• In one, government gives money to consumers and hopes they spend it.
• In another, the federal government directly buys goods and services, ranging from computers to building infrastructure.
• In the third, government hands money to state and local governments to spend.

The $862 billion stimulus package passed by Congress and signed into law by the president tried to do all three things.  Unfortunately, none of them worked, says Investor's Business Daily.

• In the case of money handed over to consumers, "It went to pay down some debt or was simply saved rather than spent on consumption."
• At the federal level, the stimulus generated just $20 billion in added government purchases, about 3 percent of the total spent;of that amount, only $4 billion was spent on infrastructure.
• Then there were the grants to state and local governments, which were expected to get local economies revving again, but were unsuccessful, according to Cogan and Taylor.

Source: "The Economic Stimulus That Wasn't," Investor's Business Daily, January 25, 2011.
For text:
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=560910&p=1

Why Obama Loves Reagan

On February 7, Time Magazine released their issue entitled "Why Obama Loves Reagan".   You can see the disgustingly photo-shopped cover if you click below>>>>

 

http://www.time.com/time/covers/0,16641,20110207,00.html

 

Two great Conservative Republican Presidents with whom Obama has erroneously compared himself to, Lincoln and Reagan, were great Communicators.  They used humor, insightful stories backed with unswerving resolve to communicate essential American values.   And Americans responded.

 

Some say Obama is a great communicator.  Not me, but some do.   But here's the thing.... being able to effectively communicate is a very important thing, but amounts to little if you can't combine it with real leadership, and a consistent Conservative philosophy that affirms our Constitution.   In other words, it's not enough to communicate, to be a great President, you also have to be right.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Bernie 

 

PS.  If you have a bit more time click below to see Larry Kudlow's discussion of more profound differences between Ronald Wilson Reagan and Barack Hussein Obama>>> http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/LarryKudlow/2011/02/12/obama_=_reagan/page/2

The Constitution: An Anti-Redistributionist Document

In an interview on Superbowl Sunday, the President, being interviewed by Bill O'Reilly, strongly disavowed (despite much evidence to the contrary) that his is a redistributionist agenda.  

 

Later, MSNBC, interviewing former Presidential Candidate and former head of the DNC Howard Dean, says that Obama was "mousetrapped"..... after all, said Dean, "Redistribution is what Government's Do".  

 

You can see the interview by clicking below.   To see the specific reference I'm talking about click ahead to 4:20, near the end of the interview.  >>> http://crooksandliars.com/karoli/howard-dean-redistribution-weath-what-gover

 

Howard Dean is right.   

 

Redistribution is exactly what traditional governments do.  That's because governments are generally about oppression.  Witness the billions in aid that went to Haiti after the terrible earthquake there.   Where did the money go?   Well not much actually got to the victims of the earthquake--- but you and I have an idea where it ended up.   Egypt also receives billions in aid from the US.... but it hasn't been seen to have been of much help to the people.  

 

In 1776 after years of re-distributive abuse by Americans who had their hard-earned money sent back to the "Mother Country" in the form of oppressive taxes, we decided that we had had enough of redistribution.   After successfully claiming our God-given rights to liberty and gaining our Independence, we eventually put into place an astonishingly Revolutionary document that enshrined our anti-redistributionist sentiment.   In fact, for the first time in world history, our Constitution made the government, not the agent of the redistribution of property, but the PROTECTOR of property.   

 

It is WE who are the revolutionaries.   And it is today, again WE THE PEOPLE, who must stand up against the redistributionist counterrevolutionaries---- people like Barack Obama and Howard Dean.

 

What do you think?

 

Best Wishes,

 

Bernie 

 

PS. Just for emphasis, you can click below to hear Dean speaking in 2010 about how Obama Care is essentially a form of redistribution.  The exact quote comes in about 6:25>>>>

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4o9BfrcOWgQ

I'm Not a Press Secretary

Here's funny video of Robert Gibbs, President Obama's outgoing press secretary.  As many have said, he will be missed as he has been one of the most entertaining press secretaries in recent memory.

Best Wishes,

Bernie

http://hotair.com/archives/2011/02/08/video-why-well-miss-robert-gibbs/

Debate Competitions Develop Better Thinkers

On Friday, I went once again to judge debates from High School-Aged home-schooled students from Ohio, Kentucky, Indian, Pennsylvania and Michigan as they debated the 2011 topic: Resolved: The United States should substantially change its trade policy toward India and/or China.

 

These students had to prepare a plan for when they were on the affirmative team--- the team proposing a plan--- and had to be able to defend against any plan that was presented if they were on the negative team-- the team opposing the plan.    And, if they were on the affirmative, they had to be on the negative side in the next round!    

 

The preparation that the two-person teams go through has to be very rigorous if they hope to win.   They've got to be on top of their game in both presenting a plan and responding to the thrusts of the other team.  And they must present well, with strong voices and positive eye-contact. 

 

And I had the pleasure of making evaluations and declaring winners in the four rounds I judged.

 

Now here's the thing.   Sports are great.   They can help you develop confidence.... leadership skills... etc.    But not everyone can be an athlete.   But anyone can think... and anyone can become a better thinker!   But it takes a bit of humility... a willingness to honestly look at the strength of one's position, and the strength of other positions.    And that's what debates can do.   Getting in front of people, speaking and being successfully persuasive...well there's nothing better to boost a young person's confidence.  And I'd encourage any young person to give it a try. 

 

Interestingly, the first affirmative team I encountered wanted to put into place policies that would put additional restrictions on Chinese intellectual property piracy.   Things like copy rights.    Sometimes the students were humorous, like when someone said that in China they interpret the copy right as a right to copy.   And they even brought up the stolen Top Gun film sequence that Chinese reporters stole to portray Chinese fighter jets.   If you didn't see it, click below.  

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thecutline/20110131/ts_yblog_thecutline/chinese-air-force-drill-looks-awfully-similar-to-top-gun

 

Still, they didn't win, because they didn't give enough evidence to show that their proposals would be an effective and substantial change from current policy... and their opponents pointed out many problems with their plan.   Still, you had to admire them for trying.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Bernie

Top Gun Goes to China

Check out the video, especially the convincing second one that indicates that a Chinese news story on their fighter jets uses a scene from the movie Top Gun, posting it as an actual event in China.

 

Oops...... Busted.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_thecutline/20110131/ts_yblog_thecutline/chinese-air-force-drill-looks-awfully-similar-to-top-gun

 

 

Best Wishes,

 

Bernie